Alex Schadenberg at U of T

Alex Schadenberg, Executive Director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, delivered a lecture at the University of Toronto last week, so we’ve been focusing on the topics he covered in our series on euthanasia and assisted suicide.

We’ve uploaded video from Alex Schadenberg’s talk at U of T to our new YouTube channel. I can’t embed the playlist here, so I’ll just embed all 10 parts (though, if you use the playlist, it should play them one after another automatically). I’ve also included some rough point form notes that I took, in case you’re looking to skim rather than watch the whole thing.

What struck me as one of the most important themes in his talk was to clear up confusion over what euthanasia is and what it isn’t. Euthanasia is about the direct and intentional cause of death, about killing people. It’s not euthanasia to kill pain. That is, an unintentional overdose of a pain killer is similar to death on a surgeon’s table; assuming that the proper precautions are being taken, death is an unintended accident of trying to provide care for the patient. That’s not euthanasia.

Also, every patient has a right to refuse treatment. That’s not euthanasia either. (Though, a right to refuse treatment doesn’t mean that it’s okay for medical practitioners to remove basic care, like food and water.) Many people don’t understand what euthanasia is and mistake it for the refusal of treatment. We need to be clear that patients have a right to refuse treatment, but that euthanasia is about giving medical practitioners the power to directly and intentionally cause the death of another person by means of something like a lethal injection.

Anyways, you can hear the whole talk (and the Q&A) in Alex’s own words.

My notes:

So many people confuse the refusal of treatment with euthanasia

definitions are everything, so much ambiguity

there’s a difference between withholding treatment and care

it’s not about the unintentional overdose (too much pain killers), it’s similar to death on a surgeon’s table — it’s about direct and intentional cause of death

it’s not euthanasia to kill pain

abuse of pain management is a serious issue however, but euthanasia proponents are trying to create confusion

are they saying that the abuse is okay?

Euthanasia by omission: withdrawal of basic medical care with the direct and intentional cause of death of a person who is not otherwise dying

this is different than accepting the limits of life and withdrawing hydration and nutrition from a person who is dying and nearing death / actively dying

Jocelyn Downie says that there’s no difference between killing and letting die

It’s not about “choice;” it’s about the rules a physician needs to follow to bring about the death of a patient

Bill C-384: it’s not about choice or autonomy

amends section 222 and section 241 of the criminal code, about euthanasia and assisted suicide

the homicide provision

do we really want to create exceptions to homicide?

Schadenberg calls the clauses “ink on paper” — just trying to pretend that there are safeguards

“you must have either tried or expressly refused appropriate treatments”

“or terminally ill”

insulin dependent diabetic who may be depressed

“appears to be lucid”

she included people undergoing mental pain…

doesn’t define terminal illness

Schadenberg died over 2 years after he was told he had 6 months to live

he would have been eligible for euthanasia at the point of shock when he was first diagnosed

does not require a witness at the time of death

does not restrict death tourism

what does any of this have to do with autonomy or choice?

it’s about giving the power to medical practitioners to be directly and intentionally causing the death of another person by lethal injection

it’s a threat to the lives of people with disabilities or other vulnerable people

Tracy Latimer

people only heard about her inabilities, not her abilities

she went to school everyday by bus, her educational assistant said that she was a happy child who was not suffering

she had a radio attached to her wheelchair that she turned on and off on her own

yet, she had such a low quality of life that she was better off dead

the perception about disability means that to be disabled means that you’re always suffering

Groningen Protocol for the euthanasia of severely ill newborns in the Netherlands

infant must have a certain diagnosis and prognosis

BUT spina bifida is a condition that is very treatable, and for the most part people have a good prognosis

infant must have a hopeless and unbearable suffering

well, if you’re not going to give them pain management or palliative care as you kill them…

must have second doctor

when did physicians become the moral arbiters of our culture?

must be carried out in accordance with the accepted medical standard

since when was infanticide accepted medical practice?

after the fact reporting

and the doctor who euthanized the patient writes the report

not a safeguard

how can you say at birth that a child’s life will be “wretched in the extreme

Schadenberg thinks the protocol exists to end the lives of infants with disabilities because the cost to society and to the parents is deemed too great to allow their lives to continue

Van der Lee (pro-euthanasia): clinical impression was that requests for euthanasia were base don well-considered decisions… but she finds the opposite was true!

also, Linda Ganzini’s study found that 15 of 58 people who’d requested assisted suicide were depressed, and none of the 49 people who died by assisted suicide in 2007 were offered a psychological assessment

Van der lee was asked to comment on the article, said that it matched her findings, but her response was… who cares? (Schadenberg: I guess they appear to be lucid)

Nadia, 18 year old student at Carlton, met someone online who convinced her to commit suicide

William Melchert-Dinkel setup a suicide pact with her… he wanted her to hang herself in front of the webcam… he had no intention of committing suicide himself

He’s now been tied to at least 5 suicides

If Bill C-384 passes, could you protect someone from someone like Melchert-Dinkel?

The law isn’t designed to restrict you, but to protect vulnerable people (the assisted suicide law)

Need clear themes

not medical treatment

lethal injection

need to work in coalitions

messages

choice is a lie

euthanasia and assisted suicide have nothing to do with autonomy

euthanasia and assisted suicide are the direct and intentional killing of people

Blaise Alleyne completed a B. Sc. at the University of Toronto in 2009 with a major in Computer Science, and minors in English and Philosophy. He is currently a part-time student in the Master of Theological Studies program at Regis College, U of T. Blaise has been involved with UTSFL since becoming a member in 2005, and is now focused on education and activism with the club.

One comment on “Alex Schadenberg at U of T”

Could you please let your members know about the following pro-life event? If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at my cell phone: (416) 476-1887. Thank you.

Vicar Tom Steers

The Lutheran Church of St. Matthew

Scarborough, ON

NEWS FROM ST. MATTHEW’S LUTHERAN CHURCH
Toronto — On Sunday, November 7th, Lutherans for Life will give a special presentation at St. Matthew’s Lutheran Church at 11 a.m.
The message of Lutherans for Life – Canada is that every human life, from conception to natural death, is precious in God’s sight. . Where: The Lutheran Church of St. Matthew
3159 Lawrence Avenue East, Toronto
(416) 431-9252